[EL] ELB News and Commentary 9/1/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Tue Sep 1 07:36:47 PDT 2015
"James O’Keefe video sting catches Clinton campaign being kind to a
Canadian” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75761>
Posted onSeptember 1, 2015 7:32 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75761>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Weigel
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/01/new-james-okeefe-video-sting-catches-clinton-campaign-being-kind-to-a-canadian/>:
Conservative undercover journalist James O’Keefe has released the
second in anongoing series
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgHEClMxnpg>of videos inside
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. The latest from Project
Veritas Action accuses the Democratic frontrunner’s director of
marketing and FEC compliance director of breaking the law, and
allowing a Canadian tourist to launder money for campaign swag.
There are just two catches. One: No one’s ever thrown the book at
an American for purchasing merchandise from a campaign, then giving
it to a foreigner as a gift. Two: The person who takes the
Canadian’s money and gives it to the Clinton campaign is the Project
Veritas Action journalist. The Clinton campaign, which hasleaked
evidence
<http://time.com/4006454/hillary-clinton-video-project-veritas/>of
other PVA stings to journalists, is gleefully brushing this one off.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75761&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20James%20O%E2%80%99Keefe%20video%20sting%20catches%20Clinton%20campaign%20being%20kind%20to%20a%20Canadian%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“Donald Trump and Campaign Finance Reform”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75759>
Posted onSeptember 1, 2015 7:26 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75759>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Fred Wertheimer writes
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/fred-wertheimer/donald-trump-and-campaign_b_8067402.html>for
Huff Post (Entertainment!).
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75759&title=%E2%80%9CDonald%20Trump%20and%20Campaign%20Finance%20Reform%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Donation to Pro-Bush Super-PAC Tied to Florida Homebuilder”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75757>
Posted onSeptember 1, 2015 7:24 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75757>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bloomberg
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-09-01/donation-to-pro-bush-super-pac-tied-to-florida-home-builder?cmpid=BBD090115_POL>:
An obscure company that contributed to the super-PAC backing Jeb
Bush’s presidential campaign has ties to the chief operating officer
of the nation’s second largest homebuilder, public records show.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75757&title=%E2%80%9CDonation%20to%20Pro-Bush%20Super-PAC%20Tied%20to%20Florida%20Homebuilder%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“After Citizens United: Extending the Liberal Revolution to
Corporations” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75754>
Posted onSeptember 1, 2015 7:22 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75754>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Daniel Greenwood has postedthis
draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2647478>on
SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This Article proposes several routes to reverse Citizens United, the
Supreme Court case holding that corporate campaign spending is
“speech” protected by the First Amendment.
The core problem of Citizens United is that corporations are
illegitimate participants in our politics. Corporate law requires
corporate officers to pursue the corporate interest. They are thus
disqualified from considering the central political questions of a
democratic capitalist country: defining the rules of the market
(which define corporate interests) and balancing profit against
other, more important, values. The high road to fixing Citizens
United is a constitutional amendment to extend the fundamental
insights of the Eighteenth Century liberal revolutions to the
corporate sector: the Constitution should protect us from corporate
officers, not the other way around.
But we can also reform Citizens United by statute. Citizens United
is based on a conceptual error: Corporate “speech” is an issue of
corporate governance, not the First Amendment. Even if we entirely
banned corporate electioneering and lobbying, every corporate
employee, investor and customer would remain entirely free to speak,
spend and unite to promote political positions. Instead, the issue
is corporate governance – for whom corporate officials work and the
limits on the authority they are given to use money that is not
their own.
No constitutional amendment is necessary. Congress or even a single
state could require a corporation which opts to electioneer to do so
in accord with our constitutional values of free debate and
democratic elections.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75754&title=%E2%80%9CAfter%20Citizens%20United%3A%20Extending%20the%20Liberal%20Revolution%20to%20Corporations%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“The New Holy Trinity” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75752>
Posted onSeptember 1, 2015 7:21 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75752>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Richard Re has posted this draft on SSRN (forthcomingGreen Bag
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2650163>):
There’s a familiar story about statutory interpretation in the
Supreme Court. Once upon a time, the Court cared primarily about
legislative purpose, even if it defied clear statutory text. But
then Antonin Scalia came to town, became a justice, and laid down a
new law: textualism. Central to Scalia’s success was his association
of purposivism with a century-old precedent called Holy Trinity.
Recently, however, purposivism seems to have evolved and, as a
result, to have gotten the upper hand. Instead of adhering to
Scalia’s New Textualism, the Roberts Court has repeatedly and
visibly embraced what might be called “The New Holy Trinity.” This
approach calls for consideration of non-textual factors when
determining how much clarity is required for a text to be clear.
This apparent methodological shift merits attention — and may have
implications for constitutional law.
Looking forward to reading this!
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75752&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20New%20Holy%20Trinity%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Some Evidence Hillary Clinton Actually Opposes Citizens United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75748>
Posted onAugust 31, 2015 8:24 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75748>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
From the latest document dump, viaDave Levinthal
<https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/638550619968696320>:
CNyWZ7wWoAEduQK
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/CNyWZ7wWoAEduQK.png>
clinton <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/clinton.png>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75748&title=Some%20Evidence%20Hillary%20Clinton%20Actually%20Opposes%20Citizens%20United&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Campaign Finance Analysis: Deadlocks Are Only Part of Story at FEC”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75746>
Posted onAugust 31, 2015 7:40 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75746>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ken Doyle for Bloomberg BNA
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=75049991&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0h2b0p7k7&split=0>:
Partisan deadlocks at Federal Election Commission have been
highlighted as the source of dysfunction at the beleaguered agency,
but a new analysis of some of the most controversial matters handled
by the FEC shows that focusing solely on the battles between the
FEC’s Democratic and Republican commissioners misses a lot of what
is really going on.
The analysis looked at more than two dozen closed enforcement cases
dealing with one of the thorniest issues now faced by the
agency—allegations of illegal coordination between nominally
independent super political action committees and the candidates
they support. The result: Democrats and Republicans on the FEC
agreed nearly three times more often than they deadlocked on these
controversial cases.
Super PAC cases are important because those organizations, which can
raise unlimited amounts of money to influence elections, are
becoming increasingly dominant in U.S. campaigns. In theory, at
least, they are supposed to remain legally independent of the
candidates they support. But, whether super PACs face any practical
limits on their activities largely is determined by the enforcement
rulings of the FEC in individual cases.
And, the bottom line in all of the cases resolved by the FEC so far
is that the allegations of illegal coordination have been dismissed.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75746&title=%E2%80%9CCampaign%20Finance%20Analysis%3A%20Deadlocks%20Are%20Only%20Part%20of%20Story%20at%20FEC%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
“The Donald Trump of the Left; Larry Lessig may have the most
distorted views of what the presidency is.”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75744>
Posted onAugust 31, 2015 7:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75744>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Seth Masket
<http://www.psmag.com/politics-and-law/the-donald-trump-of-the-left>at
Pacific Standard:
Overall, Lessig seems to be treating the presidency as a symbol, or
simply a bulletin board on which to attach his reform manifesto. The
presidency may be those things (and has certainly been used as such
by many others before Lessig), but it’s also an actual job. Lessig
has displayed no interest in holding it. His whole campaign is a
gimmick, and this does his reform ideas no favors.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75744&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Donald%20Trump%20of%20the%20Left%3B%20Larry%20Lessig%20may%20have%20the%20most%20distorted%20views%20of%20what%20the%20presidency%20is.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
Two Preview Talks on “Plutocrats United”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75741>
Posted onAugust 31, 2015 4:01 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75741>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I’ve just approved the final corrections to my Yale University Press
book,Plutocrats United: Campaign Money, the Supreme Court, and the
Distortion of American Elections
<http://yalepress.yale.edu/reviews.asp?isbn=9780300212457>due out Jan.
12. (You can preorder at a 28% discount atAmazon
<http://www.amazon.com/Plutocrats-United-Campaign-Distortion-Elections/dp/0300212453/ref=la_B0089NJCR2_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1430416698&sr=1-7>.)
I’ll be doing a book tour in January and February which should take me
to LA, NY, DC, Irvine, Boston, Philadelphia, Atlanta, and Miami (with
perhaps more to be added). I’ll announce details in December. But I’ll
be previewing the talk in the fall, with aConstitution Day lecture
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Con-Day-Poster-8-19-15-1.pdf> September
16 at Chico State and aDemocracy Studies lecture
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/events/index.php?ID=24155> October 8 at Ohio
State.
Looking forward to talking about the book. Here is the book description:
Campaign financing is one of today’s most divisive political issues.
The left asserts that the electoral process is rife with corruption.
The right protests that the real aim of campaign limits is to
suppress political activity and protect incumbents. Meanwhile, money
flows freely on both sides. In/Plutocrats United,/Richard Hasen
argues that both left and right avoid the key issue of the new
Citizens United era: balancing political inequality with free speech.
The Supreme Court has long held that corruption and its appearance
are the only reasons to constitutionally restrict campaign funds.
Progressives often agree but have a much broader view of corruption.
Hasen argues for a new focus and way forward: if the government is
to ensure robust political debate, the Supreme Court should allow
limits on money in politics to prevent those with great economic
power from distorting the political process.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75741&title=Two%20Preview%20Talks%20on%20%E2%80%9CPlutocrats%20United%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Plutocrats United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>
TV Interview with Eric O’Keefe about WI John Doe 2
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75739>
Posted onAugust 31, 2015 3:26 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75739>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Watch
<http://www.wisn.com/politics/upfront/okeefe-raids-were-abusive/34994992>.
More here.
<http://www.wisn.com/politics/upfront/okeefe-john-doe-probes-national-disgrace/34994910>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75739&title=TV%20Interview%20with%20Eric%20O%E2%80%99Keefe%20about%20WI%20John%20Doe%202&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“More Than 40 U.S. Senators Call for Disclosure of Corporate
Political Spending” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75737>
Posted onAugust 31, 2015 1:29 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75737>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Release: <http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=5624>
In a letter released today, 44 senators are calling on U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Mary Jo White to act
on a rulemaking petition that would require companies to disclose
their political spending.
Spearheaded by U.S. Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Charles Schumer
(D-N.Y.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Robert
Menendez (D-N.J.), the letter states, “If implemented, the Petition
would require public companies to disclose to their shareholders how
they use corporate resources for political activities, bringing much
needed accountability to shareholders and transparency to corporate
political spending. We believe this is consistent with the SEC’s
requirement for public companies to disclose meaningful financial
information to the public.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75737&title=%E2%80%9CMore%20Than%2040%20U.S.%20Senators%20Call%20for%20Disclosure%20of%20Corporate%20Political%20Spending%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Wisconsin needs stronger campaign disclosure laws”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75735>
Posted onAugust 31, 2015 1:27 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75735>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel editorial.
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/wisconsin-needs-stronger-campaign-disclosure-laws-b99562870z1-323272751.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75735&title=%E2%80%9CWisconsin%20needs%20stronger%20campaign%20disclosure%20laws%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
--
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu
hhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150901/940ae5c6/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150901/940ae5c6/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CNyWZ7wWoAEduQK.png
Type: image/png
Size: 109586 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150901/940ae5c6/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: clinton.png
Type: image/png
Size: 133938 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150901/940ae5c6/attachment-0002.png>
View list directory